Comments on: Guest commentary: FTTH or wireless, which is more cost-effective? http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/07/fiber-or-wireless-which-is-more-cost-effective/ Municipal wireless, citywide WiFi, WiMAX, broadband news Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:07:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Mike O http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/07/fiber-or-wireless-which-is-more-cost-effective/comment-page-1/#comment-37819 Mike O Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:49:33 +0000 http://www.muniwireless.com/?p=7783#comment-37819 Some statements about FTTH are not correct. Yes cost is high but when done correctly it should not cost the users any more than WIMAX yet provide a much better service. FTTH with Wimax on top - a dream come true communitynetworks@live.com Some statements about FTTH are not correct.
Yes cost is high but when done correctly it should not cost the users any more than WIMAX yet provide a much better service.
FTTH with Wimax on top – a dream come true
communitynetworks@live.com

]]> By: Peter http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/07/fiber-or-wireless-which-is-more-cost-effective/comment-page-1/#comment-34098 Peter Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:23:47 +0000 http://www.muniwireless.com/?p=7783#comment-34098 Good start and you should also look at what some cities are doing with high bandwidth wireless, e.g. Chicago looking to deploy to deploy 1Gbps 2 to 5km links as a logical ring backed into fibre POPs. In our own work we are looking at using 200 to 600Mbps FDX rings (at 18GHz, up to 20km) as a tier 2 network to support an underlying WiMAX network @ 3.5GHz and 2.5GHz. There are many options and a combo FTTS (to the street) plus local WiMAX is also a winner as is CTTS (cable to the street) plus WiMAX - where it is no possible to do a dig because of terrain. Peter Good start and you should also look at what some cities are doing with high bandwidth wireless, e.g. Chicago looking to deploy to deploy 1Gbps 2 to 5km links as a logical ring backed into fibre POPs.

In our own work we are looking at using 200 to 600Mbps FDX rings (at 18GHz, up to 20km) as a tier 2 network to support an underlying WiMAX network @ 3.5GHz and 2.5GHz.

There are many options and a combo FTTS (to the street) plus local WiMAX is also a winner as is CTTS (cable to the street) plus WiMAX – where it is no possible to do a dig because of terrain.

Peter

]]> By: Human Modem » Blog Archive » Monday Morning Networking - 6/9/2008 http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/07/fiber-or-wireless-which-is-more-cost-effective/comment-page-1/#comment-34093 Human Modem » Blog Archive » Monday Morning Networking - 6/9/2008 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:29:46 +0000 http://www.muniwireless.com/?p=7783#comment-34093 [...] FTTH (Fiber-to-the-Home) or wireless, which is more cost-effective? - A brief look at the current offerings of these two technologies. [...] [...] FTTH (Fiber-to-the-Home) or wireless, which is more cost-effective? – A brief look at the current offerings of these two technologies. [...]

]]> By: Rory Conaway http://www.muniwireless.com/2008/06/07/fiber-or-wireless-which-is-more-cost-effective/comment-page-1/#comment-34091 Rory Conaway Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:07:06 +0000 http://www.muniwireless.com/?p=7783#comment-34091 There are several inaccuracies in this document. 1) Although 2.5GHz is a high-bandwidth band, so is 3.6GHz and the new 700MHz band of which companies just spent 19 billion dollars acquiring (Verizon being the biggest player). 2) EV-DO is turning in numbers of 2Mbps or more on download. However, it's in the same frequencies as cell phones, not the 400-900MHz range. On the positive side, innovative RF engineering ideas are coming forth now that the big municipal Wi_Fi companies have now thrown in the towel. Smaller companies such as ours have designed systems that cost 1/10 as much as the older municipal Wi-Fi designs with better performance. It's these kinds of ideas that will move wireless back into the limelight in a positive manner rather than just getting headlines for the spectacular failures of two extremely poor business models. There are several inaccuracies in this document.

1) Although 2.5GHz is a high-bandwidth band, so is 3.6GHz and the new 700MHz band of which companies just spent 19 billion dollars acquiring (Verizon being the biggest player).

2) EV-DO is turning in numbers of 2Mbps or more on download. However, it’s in the same frequencies as cell phones, not the 400-900MHz range.

On the positive side, innovative RF engineering ideas are coming forth now that the big municipal Wi_Fi companies have now thrown in the towel. Smaller companies such as ours have designed systems that cost 1/10 as much as the older municipal Wi-Fi designs with better performance. It’s these kinds of ideas that will move wireless back into the limelight in a positive manner rather than just getting headlines for the spectacular failures of two extremely poor business models.

]]>